• 한국임상수의학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국임상수의학회 2008년도 춘계학술대회
• /
• pp.136-136
• /
• 2008

• Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
• /
• 제16권7호
• /
• pp.3083-3083
• /
• 2015

• Clinical and Experimental Pediatrics
• /
• 제63권6호
• /
• pp.215-216
• /
• 2020

• Clinical and Experimental Pediatrics
• /
• 제64권12호
• /
• pp.628-629
• /
• 2021

• Korean Circulation Journal
• /
• 제53권9호
• /
• pp.648-649
• /
• 2023

• Korean Circulation Journal
• /
• 제53권9호
• /
• pp.650-651
• /
• 2023

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• 제30권sup2호
• /
• pp.235-241
• /
• 2001

Objective : Controversy exists which surgical treatment better in lumbar grade I spondylolisthesis, decompressive laminectomy with or without lumbar instrumentation. Methods : Out of Sixty-four patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis underwent surgery, 18 patients operated with decompressive laminectomy alone and 44 patients with decompession and lumbar instrument, during recent 5-years between January, 1994 and December, 1998. The author studied a long term follow-up in the above two groups to analyzing the overall clinical outcomes in each group and to determining the incidence of pos-toperative radiologic instability. Results : 1) Overall postoperative symptoms improvement were not so different in both groups. 2) Postoperative progressive subluxation is more common after decompressive laminectomy without instrumentation than with instrumentation group. 3) Overall clinical outcomes were slightly better in decompressive laminectomy without instrumentation than with instrumentation group but there was no significant difference. 4) Postoperative radiologic changes did not seem to influence the patient-reported clinical outcomes. 5) Postoperative complications is more common in decompressive laminectomy with instrumentation group than without instrumentation group. Conclusion : In the surgical management of grade I spondylolisthesis, the efficiency and superiority of surgical treatments requires the cost effectiveness and risk/benefit analysis of decompressive laminectomy with or without instrumentation. Therefore, Further detailed studies of long term follow up in a large number of patients in each group are needed for choice of best treatment.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• 제52권3호
• /
• pp.194-205
• /
• 2022

Purpose: This study aimed to determine the long-term outcomes after peri-implantitis treatment and the factors affecting these outcomes. Methods: This study included 92 implants in 45 patients who had been treated for peri-implantitis. Clinical data on the characteristics of patients and their implants were collected retrospectively. The change in the marginal bone level was calculated by comparing the baseline and the most recently obtained (≥3 years after treatment) radiographs. The primary outcome variable was progression of the disease after the treatment at the implant level, which was defined as further bone loss of >1.0 mm or implant removal. A 2-level binary logistic regression analysis was used to identify the effects of possible factors on the primary outcome. Results: The mean age of the patients was 58.7 years (range, 22-79 years). Progression of peri-implantitis was observed in 64.4% of patients and 63.0% of implants during an observation period of 6.4±2.7 years (mean±standard deviation). Multivariable regression analysis revealed that full compliance to recall visits (P=0.019), smoking (P=0.023), placement of 4 or more implants (P=0.022), and marginal bone loss ≥4 mm at baseline (P=0.027) significantly influenced the treatment outcome. Conclusions: The long-term results of peri-implantitis treatment can be improved by full compliance on the part of patients, whereas it is impaired by smoking, placement of multiple implants, and severe bone loss at baseline. Encouraging patients to stop smoking and to receive supportive care is recommended before treatment.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• 제57권1호
• /
• pp.53-61
• /
• 2024

Background: In the treatment of esophageal cancer, a gastric conduit is typically the first choice. However, when the stomach is not a viable option, the usual alternative is a colon conduit. This study compared the long-term surgical outcomes of gastric and colon conduits over the same interval and aimed to identify factors influencing the prognosis. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted of patients who underwent esophagectomy followed by reconstruction for primary esophageal cancer between January 2006 and December 2020. Results: The study included 1,545 patients, with a gastric conduit used for 1,429 (92.5%) and a colon conduit for 116 (7.5%). Using propensity-matched analysis, 116 patients were selected from each group for comparison. No significant difference was observed in longterm survival between the gastric and colon conduit groups, irrespective of anastomosis level and pathological stage. A higher proportion of patients in the colon conduit group experienced postoperative complications compared to the gastric conduit group (57.8% vs. 25%, p<0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed that age over 65 years, body mass index below 22.0 kg/m², neoadjuvant therapy, postoperative anastomotic leakage, and renal failure were risk factors for overall survival in patients with a colon conduit. Regarding conduit-related complications, cervical nastomosis was the only significant risk factor among those with a colon conduit. Conclusion: Despite the association of colon conduits with high morbidity rates relative to gastric conduits, the long-term outcomes of colon conduits were acceptable. More consideration should be given perioperatively to the use of a colon conduit, particularly in cases involving cervical anastomosis.

• 한국간담췌외과학회지
• /
• 제27권1호
• /
• pp.87-94
• /
• 2023

Backgrounds/Aims: Central pancreatectomy (CP) is associated with a higher rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), and it is less preferred over distal pancreatectomy (DP). We compared the short- and long-term outcomes between CP and DP for low-grade pancreatic neck and body tumors. Methods: This was a propensity score-matched case-control study of patients who underwent either CP or DP for low-grade pancreatic neck and body tumors from 2003 to 2020 in a tertiary care unit in southern India. Patients with a tumor >10 cm or a distal residual stump length of <4 cm were excluded. Demographics, clinical profile, intraoperative and postoperative parameters, and the long-term postoperative outcomes for exocrine and endocrine insufficiency, weight gain, and the 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) quality of life questionnaire were compared. Results: Eighty-eight patients (CP: n=37 [cases], DP: n=51 [control]) were included in the unmatched group after excluding 21 patients (meeting exclusion criteria). After matching, both groups had 37 patients. The clinical and demographic profiles were comparable between the two groups. Blood loss and POPF rates were significantly higher in the CP group. However, Clavien-Dindo grades of complications were similar between the two groups (p = 0.27). At a median follow-up of 38 months (range = 187 months), exocrine sufficiency was similar between the two groups. Endocrine sufficiency, weight gain, SF-36 pain control score, and general health score were significantly better in the CP group. Conclusions: Despite equivalent clinically significant morbidities, long-term outcomes are better after CP compared to DP in low-grade pancreatic body tumors.